nanog mailing list archives

Re: Choice of network space when numbering interfaces with IPv6 (IPv6 STANDARDS)


From: Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 07:56:40 -0700


On Oct 16, 2010, at 4:52 PM, Bill Bogstad wrote:

On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Kevin Oberman <oberman () es net> wrote:
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2010 00:40:41 +1030
From: Mark Smith <nanog () 85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc nosense org>

On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 12:31:22 +0100
Randy Bush <randy () psg com> wrote:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-6man-prefixlen-p2p-00.txt


Drafts are drafts, and nothing more, aren't they?

Drafts are drafts. Even most RFCs are RFCs and nothing more. Only a
handful have ever been designated as "Standards". I hope this becomes
one of those in the hope it will be taken seriously. (It already is by
anyone with a large network running IPv6.)

And none of the listed IETF "full standards" are IPv6 related.  That
seems a little bit odd to me given that everyone is supposed to have
implemented them by now.

Bill Bogstad

IPv4 was much further along in deployment than IPv6 is now when the first
IPv4 STDs were published as STDs.

Usually RFCs bake for quite a while in the real world before becoming STDs.

Owen



Current thread: